Study Nedarim folio 11B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
It is taught in a baraita: If one declares food: Non-sacred, or: The non-sacred, or: Like the non-sacred, then whether he combines that expression with the phrase: That which I eat of yours, or: That which I do not eat of yours, he has not expressed a vow and the food remains permitted. However
The Talmud analyzes this baraita: Who is the author of the first clause of the baraita? It is R' Meir, who does not hold that from a negative statement you can infer a positive statement. Consequently, even if one said: That which I do not eat of yours shall be considered non-sacred, that does not i
However, say the latter clause of that baraita: If one says: That which I will not eat of yours shall be considered laḥullin, the other individual’s food remains permitted to him. But didn’t we learn in a Mishnah (13a) that if one says: That which I will not eat of yours shall be considered lakorba
And to answer this difficulty, R' Abba said: It is as though he said: It shall be for an offering [lekorban], and therefore I will not eat that which is yours. Here too, when he said: That which I will not eat of yours shall be considered laḥullin, this is what he said to him: It shall not be non-
The Talmud answers: This tanna of the baraita holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir in one case and disagrees with his opinion in another. He holds in accordance with his opinion in one case, in that he does not hold that from a negative statement you can infer a positive statement. And he